UK tells Mercosur it will resist any attempts to coerce the Falklands

The British government said it would resist any attempts to coerce the Falkland Islands through economic or other pressures, and revealed it is holding ‘productive discussions’ with Uruguay, Chile and Brazil to ensure trade and commercial links between the Islands and South America are not compromised by political declarations.

Foreign Secretary William Hague: the decision to close ports to ships flying the Falklands flag has no legal basis.

The political declaration refers to Mercosur decision to close ports to ships flying the Falklands flag, which has ‘no legal basis’, and would be unacceptable and unbecoming for any Latin American democracy to collaborate in Argentina’s attempts to economically blockade the Falkland Islands, according to the Foreign Office ministerial written statement released on Monday.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Lord Howell of Guilford made the presentation before the House of the written statement from Foreign Secretary William Hague which was defined as an update on the British Government’s response to statements made in South America regarding the Falkland Islands during the Christmas recess.

The statement adds that all three countries have said that “they have no intention of participating in an economic blockade of the Falkland Islands and that all Falklands-related commercial shipping will continue to enjoy access to their ports, in accordance with domestic and international law, if they are flying the Red Ensign or another national flag when docked”.

Follows the full statement:

On 15th December the Government of Uruguay declared that they would deny access to their ports to ships flying the Falklands flag. This was followed five days later by a statement from the summit of the Mercosur group of countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, with associate members including Chile) that echoed the Uruguayan announcement.

Our response has been justifiably robust. The Uruguayan Ambassador was formally summoned to the FCO and I spoke twice to the Uruguayan Foreign Minister to underline how seriously we regard this development. Our Ambassadors in the region were instructed to call on their host governments to express our strong objection to the Mercosur statement and to assess the practical implications for vessels operating between the Falklands and South America.
We made clear that the decision to close ports to ships flying the Falklands flag has no legal basis, and that it would be unacceptable and unbecoming for any Latin American democracy to collaborate in Argentina’s attempts to economically blockade the Falkland Islands. We reiterated our strong support for the rights of the Islanders to determine their political future, and also made clear that any attempts to coerce them through economic or other pressures would be resisted by the British Government. Such actions are inconsistent with the principles of the United Nations Charter and the rights of the Falkland Islands people to trade openly and without hindrance.

Whilst we do not accept that the decision to refuse entry to vessels flying the Falklands flag has any basis in international law, our priority has been to ensure that the trade and commercial links between the Falklands and South America are not compromised by this political declaration. We have had productive and honest discussions with Uruguay, Chile and Brazil. All three countries have said that they have no intention of participating in an economic blockade of the Falkland Islands and that all Falklands-related commercial shipping will continue to enjoy access to their ports, in accordance with domestic and international law, if they are flying the Red Ensign or another national flag when docked.

I hope that others in the region will continue to recognise that differences of opinion over UK sovereignty of the Falkland Islands can not justify collusion in efforts to intimidate an innocent civilian population through economic pressure. The British Government will always ensure that the Falkland Islanders’ right to determine their political future is respected.

More broadly, we will continue to strengthen our engagement of Latin America, as I set out in my Canning House speech in November 2010. The UK has considerable political, economic and security interests in the region, with high potential for future economic growth through partnership with Latin America. I am confident that this important agenda is consistent, and indeed mutually reinforcing, with our desire to ensure that the interests and wishes of the Falkland Islanders are protected.

Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Comments should refer to article. Thank you.

Argentina carries on with words and we get on with business. More drilling to come in a few weeks and a busy January - June for RKH. Looks like the FI is marching on which demonstrates the irrelevance of Argentina.

We made ​​it clear that the decision to close the ports to vessels flying the flag of Falkland has no legal basis and would be unacceptable and unworthy of a democracy in Latin America to collaborate in an attempt to block Argentina's economic Malvinas Islands.

Obviously, the UK does not comply and does not act under international law, and is acting outside the law because it does not meet resolution 2065 (XX) of 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49 ), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25) . They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute and reaffirm the invitation made ​​in resolution 2065 (XX) Parties (Argentina and the United Kingdom) to proceed without delay with the negotiations recommended by the Committee of United Nations Decolonization.
Argentina is supported by all the democracies of Latin America, reflecting all its organizations from the United Nations resolutions, OAS, CELAC, UNASUR and MERCOSUR.
The claim of sovereignty is continental and global levels. The Falkland Islands belong to South America and not Europe.

The Falkland Islands are in the south atlantic, not south america. And they no more belong to south america than the Caribean belongs to south america.
Oh and the south atlantic is British territory, you'll just have to go colonise somewhere else.
Try Uraguay, it's on the conentinal shelf, it was part of the Spanish Viceroyalty and you have occupied a few time already.

Once again the Argentinean bloggers totally ignore the current topic, in favour of purely anti British rhetoric,
Perhaps their education does not permit them to understand the word [diplomatic]
The British government has spoken to the other 3 countries, and have been assured that F/I ships with the red ensign will in no way be hindered, or harmed, they were reminded of their legal duties and obligations,
That sadly passes Argentina by, this has been successful,
And thus the final result for all to see, even the indoctrinated,
Argentina has lost the support of her friends, who would rather instigate the law, rather than abuse the law,
So in fact, this is a failure for CFK and a victory for common sense .
.

@17 Briton... there´s no failure but only success lately for Argentina and CFK about Malvinas. UK flag ships were never meant to be unwelcome in Mercosur. The block is only for ilegal FI flag vessels. There´s only reinforce of the support of Argentinas claims.
Doesn´t you superior intelect allow you to see that?

the UK is twisting the events...
neither Argentina nor other Merco countries do blokade on Islands
BUT
no one in these countries want to make trade with Islanders.
presumably that the Islanders are broke for trade......!!

The Brasilians,Uruguayans and Chilenos will all do whats in their self interest.As South American intertrade is growing rapidly and Europe declines every day its obvious how things will pan out long term.What the City lovers on here are really the remnants of the flat earth society.
The insults of the flat earth,book searching,iron hunting brigade merely show just how much she has rattled the likes of the failed politician Hague.
Briton you show sense in the economic sphere where you have totally endorsed CFKs policies as a panacea for England.Its a pity your bias cant allow you to see the realities ahead.It will be easier for you.
The noose tightening on the planters will be a slow deliberate process.But CFK has the patience and determination for it.

27 When Im there its wonderful.Argentina is a wonderful country truly beautiful with a host of wonders to enjoy,from the Iguazu falls to Perito Moreno glaciar,to the Sierras of Cordoba the Atlantic beaches the Andes in Salta and Mendoza.There lots more not to mention Buenos Aires.
What the Irish planters as you call them accept is the right of the Argentines to run their country as they see fit.Its a pity others dont adopt the same attitude

Lol you should check who wrote the article and actually reading the article before jumping to the wrong assumption based purely on the last sentence. By the way that last sentence could mean anything from the UK taking the matter to the UN general assembly, ICJ or even applying trade sanctions on argentina via the UN and EU (Bit like they have with IRAN), all of which are seen as civilised measures.

23 O gara
.
Briton you show sense in the economic sphere where you have totally endorsed CFKs policies
I have not totally endorsed anyone, this is your interpretation,

I agree that all governments should invest in its people, and that include infrastructure, roads[railways ] fishing industry , power , ect,
If your CFK is doing that, then good for her, but , and the same to all countries,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Europe has problems, but is not going downhill,
This is Argentina and others,
You seem to be slightly confused, your economy is on the up,[is this correct]
And the European economy is on the down[is this correct]

Then why in the real world Argentina is still poorer that Europe,
Less able to cope with it debts, and no power,

The point in question is
Argentina today, should be at such a level that you should be up up and away, and leaving other in your wake, including the Europeans, [but you are not]

Europe on the other hand, should be finished, but it is not,

So the fact may well be,
We are not doing as bad as you lot seem to think,,
Argentina on the other hand,
Is not doing as well as you like us to think,
[is this not true]

I'm very new to this, (I'm neither British or Argentine) but does anyone think the UK will EVER abandon 3,000 people? I'm sure that Argentina would NEVER abandon thousands of citizens or force them to move from their homes. Why do you think the British would?

I'm sure there are arguments for each side but in reality (if you assume the Brits won't abandon their people) this is about either money or politics. (Unless you are willing to again go to war) Either the politicians are after the oil money, or looking for an issue to get votes.

If it's about money the British may be able to cut some kind of deal but if it's only about getting votes then the Brits are wasting their time even talking because any smart Argintinian politician doesn't want to win. If they did win, the issue (& their voters) would go away!

You're right, when we talk about that in these years Nestor and Cristina Kirchner established as state policy on disarmament and non-violence and bet on the dialogue and peace among peoples, a decision has not been exclusive to them (Nestor and Cristina Kirchner).
This decision was accompanied during the whole Argentine politician from right to left politics of the country from 1983 onwards to claim on all international forums, the truth of the Falklands conflict.
The struggle that has taken our country and have started kirchner is similar to the civil rights struggle led by Luther King in the U.S. or Perez Esquivel (Nobel Peace Prize) in their struggle for human rights against the dictatorship and claims of military dialogue in the Falklands conflict.
On the Falklands, Cristina said must be met 10 UN resolutions have called for Britain to sit down and negotiate our sovereignty, and stressed the duty of all members to accept the resolutions of the Assembly.
That it comes to fulfilling resolution 2065 (XX) of 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute and reaffirm resolution 2065 (XX) Parties (Argentina and the United Kingdom) ”to proceed without delay with the negotiations recommended by the Committee of the United Nations decolonization.
thank you very much

@29 Sofabed: The status of the Falklands as a Crown Dependency is an anomaly and an anachronism, not only to Latin American countries but to many in the broad stream membership of the United Nations as well.

That extract form the article shows just how ill-informed the author is. The only Crown Dependencies are the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. The Falkland Islands have never been one. The concept of The Falkland Islands as a Crown Dependency might be an interesting one, though. It would essentially be a partnership with the UK, with the UK still responsible for defence and (with consultation) aspects of foregn affairs. It wouldn't in any way be considered colonial (c.f the other Crown Dependencies), so it would have to be removed from the list of non-self-governing territories..

38 Raul
Your comparison of your grandiose pretensions towards our home and the human rights struggle of Martin Luther King is nothing short of obscene.
You want to take away our human rights and you are not fit to even mention his name. You make me feel a bit ill actually.

38 Raul
10 UN resolutions have called for Britain to sit down and negotiate our sovereignty,”
One of you must be lying,

You are stating that the UN have called for great Britain to negotiate
YOUR SOVEREIGNTY,
In that case case RAUL
Prove it,
Show us all the article in your document that shows prove
That the UN demands great Britain negotiate YOUR SOVEREIGNTY,

Carlos Saavedra Lamas
He was born on 1 November 1878 and died on May 5, 1959.
He was Minister of Foreign Exteriores.Ganó the Nobel Peace Prize in 1936 for his role in resolving the conflict between Bolivia and Paraguay.

BERNARDO ALBERTO HOUSSAY
Born April 10, 1887 and died in 1971.
He won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1947 by the discovery of the role of the anterior pituitary lobe hormone in the metabolism of sugar.

Luis Federico Leloir
He was born on September 6, 1906 and died in 1987.Ganó Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1970 for his work in biochemistry to discover sugar nucleotides and their role in the biosynthesis of carbohydrates.

Adolfo Perez Esquivel
Born in 1931 (still living). He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1980 for his work defending human rights based solely on non-violent means through the Service for Peace and Justice Organization since 1974.

Cesar Milstein
He was born on October 8, 1927 and died on March 24 2002.Ganó the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1984 for the development of the hybridoma technique for producing monoclonal antibodies. These antibodies have the particularity to penetrate the tumor cells. The technique allows the unlimited production of monoclonal antibodies with predetermined specificity. This will open new fields of theoretical and applied biomedical research and have allowed an accurate diagnosis and treatment of diseases.

As you can see we have the authority to speak on human rights. suffered 30,000 disappeared during the military dictatorship.
thanks

41 Briton Argentina right now is richer than many parts of Europe including countries within the Euro Zone.Certainly it has along way to go to reach Freanch levels of quality of life for example but the gap is closing quickly.
I dont for one minute suggest Argentina is perfect.It has many qualities lovely people, wonderful scenery,a terrific capital,great wines fantastic futbol great culture and a fast growing economy to mention but a few.
However corruption is a problem as are the drivers who although improving leave a lot to be desired and the bureaucracy is a pain.
Nevertheless my main argument and its a consistent one is that this young country with an even younger democracy is improving rapidly and has truly vast potential.I beleive the European powers have had their time in the Sun and overall did a lot more harm than good.Now its anothers time.
Lets be fair in another thread what you proposed Cameron should do are 100%Argentine government policy

Hi. It's nice to know that it looks like the Falklands have oils resources worth exploiting, it will do our economy (and that of the Falklanders) a power of good.

However, for most British people, defending the islands is a matter of principle. We were attacked by Argentina in 1982, and hundreds of our servicemen died or were maimed for life while liberating the Islanders (who are mostly of UK descent) from a pretty unpleasant occupation.

These events are still very much in living memory. The very idea of giving the islands to the very same people who launched that unprovoked invasion in 1982 sickens us. It would betray our war dead. It would betray the islanders, they would face discrimination and the destruction of their identity, at the very least.

If you read the Argentines' post on other threads you will see that many of them consider the islanders to be usurpers and interlopers. They would evict them from their homes in a heartbeat.

There is no way that the people of Britain would allow that to happen.

Anyway, to business:

So now it's official. The blockade is merely a paper exercise and has no real teeth. I don't see Urugauy, Brazil or Chile falling over themselves to back you up. It looks like they are paying lip service to the idea of solidarity, and it's basically business as usual as far as trade with the Falklands is concerned.

The only nation that may back you up is Venezuala, old Mr Chavez (a socialist crackpot running his country into the ground) , the friend of Mr Ahmadinejad (the holocaust denier who makes empty threats to blockade the straight of hormuz, sound familiar...).

What exalted company CFK can count on for support (don't mention china again- they're too busy winding up their neighbours over the Spratly/Paracel island area to do any more than give you moral support)

@43: O gara
Some good points and let's hope Argentina does manage to sort itself out. I get first hand accounts of some of the problems from my distant cousins over there.

I would disagree that Europe has had its time in the Sun. I think it is trying to reinvent itself at the moment although the UK obviously has different ideas on how this should be done. Maybe we should revisit that one in another 100 years time and take stock. Whether it did more harm than good is debatable - we just don't know what things would have been like if Europe hadn't become dominant. Argentina wouldn't have come into being, so we wouldn't be having this discussion.

You're amazing. You have eyes but see not, ears have not heard.
Leave the hatred and resentment towards Argentina and understand better!
Argentina always believed in the human rights struggle, we suffer 30,000 disappeared during the military dictatorship. Nestor and Cristina Kirchner, refused obedience, and pardons end of Menem and Alfonsin. With the truth trials, the prosecuted and are incarcerated for their crimes. Nestor and Cristina Kirchner have understood that the struggle for human rights is a cause of humanity without distinction of race and creed. Argentina has two Nobel peace prizes: Carlos Saavedra Lamas and Adolfo Perez Esquivel, who supports the Celac Argentina in Argentine rights over the islands.

I recommend the following link.Read them, please comment with prejudice before!

Ok Crackpot a Malbec or a Guinness for me and for you a pint of plain? in 100 years time sounds good.
Of course I exaggerate about Europe but there can be little doubt its importance is on the decline.
About what Argentina is right now you are 100% correct.Argentina is largely a country of European immigrants similar to Canada or Australia even the US.Unlike these with huge immigration from Bolivia and Paraguay in particular the indiginous influence much to the disgust of the likes of xbarilox is markedly increasing

48 Crackpot and 43: O gara
I agree, see we can talk sensible when it is common [only]
yes mr Cameron has a lot to prove, i have stated always, and most agree, governments first priority is its own people, and should invest, both have a lot to prove,
As for Argentina time will tell on this point,
And Cameron has a lot riding on him, sadly he is saddled with an idiot like clegg,
But time will tell,, 100 years perhaps miracles will happen .
Thanks

45/32 Listen of course on one level the 2-3000 residents views have to have huge importance.On the other the historical reality and geography.In Ireland we had this impossible conundrum made more complex by a large minority in the occupied part of the island.Eventually to everyones benefit after incredibly complex negotiations the issue has been more or less solved.The ”Unionists a slight majority(artificial in my view)and the Nationalists agreed an eternal coalition government with influence from London and Dublin.This situation would remain the same until a majority voted to join a united Ireland which then presumably have a London voice to protect the new minority.
The Malvinas/Falklands is different but similar and eventually London/Buenos Aires and Stanley/Pt.Argentino will have to sit down and sort it out.
Its complex but both eventually will be pragmatic and agree a solution

@50 O gara:
They make a great winter porter (Ringwood XXXX Porter) at my local brewery. Hopefully, they'll still be making it in 100 years time. Failing that, a pint of the black stuff with a whiskey chaser will do.

people who help thieve and pirats use to be executed in UK, I am sure mercosur will like to stay in the right side of the law, specially this close to home when we all know bery well what the europeans do for a living, if you still don't know, find the natives of usa, canada and australia to get a good idea.

The Falkland Islands belongs to the people of the Falkland Islands .They do not want to negotiate anything because there is simply nothing to negotiate.....it is not negotiable and that right to NOT negotiate is upheld as a fundamental principle of the United Nations.

Excellent move Argentina once again! It is NOT ONLY Argentina who ratified the decision but all three other countries! The so called flag is NOT accepted as it it illegal! As to the blockade, Argentina is not seeking that but having her sovereignty rights duly recognised, and this ratification and move is more than significant! Poor Cameron, hemmay lie to his own Parliament but not to the rest of the world: there's not such a thing as a Malvinas flag as they are part of Argentina!

Viscount, btw, the UN requests UK anf Srgentina to negotiate the solution to the sovereignty dispute, not a principle it expressly discards in this case as there is not a people subject to colonialism here!

With all due respect, once you hear that there is a conflict of sovereignty? Did you ever resolution 2065 (XX) of 1965? , Later confirmed by other resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute.
Once you hear that there is a committee of the United Nations decolonization and that all resolutions calling dictates years to resolve the sovereignty dispute. Did you hear that there was ever a war in 1982?
Please ... leave the hatred and arrogance. Think like a statesman and stop thinking like a holigans.

66 The Gringo

Dear Gringo
Argentina had four English Invasions (1806-1807-1833-1845). Today Argentina has no weapons. UK continues to colonialism and imperialism reflected in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Iran with humanitarian bombing civilians. Did I ask? Who is the warmonger? Who is the international terrorist?
You are peace-loving states. Please ... ...
Who am I kidding?Enough of your lies! You are a lover of peace of the graveyard.

@68 Please ... leave the hatred and arrogance. Think like a statesman and stop thinking like a holigans.......thats bloody rich coming from an Argentinian,we have not banned any flagged vessels,not even an Argentinian one !We are trying to manage fish stocks,You have buggered up your fisheries and want to find a way of ruining ours.You see oil and you want it.. even though its not yours.Your politicians spend so much of their their time licking CFK,s arse that they can no longer see where your country is heading and all the time CFK is diverting attention away from Argentina's HUGH problems.Wake up !!
Raul Rejuntado....

@Raul
strange, you keep citing these long out of date resolutions, all of which before and during 1982 argentina broke and made void, and the few afterwards were already redundant by contravening the UN Charter and ICJ precedents with similar issues.

tell me why should long obsolete resolutions, which hold zero legal weight whatsoever, and which have no longer been issued for over 20 years (thus showing the world officially dropping interest), be given more importance than Legally binding, and universally recognized provisions in the UN charter and ICJ rulings on issues of self determination, sovereignty and other such issues? what legal argument do you have?

similarly of there is a sovereignty dispute why does argentina refuse to take the case to the ICJ which has solved numerous cases? Britain attempted to take it to the court multiple times, yet argentina always refused in favor of bullying the islanders.

thirdly what legal argument do you have that authoritatively proves that the aforementioned Non Legal, Non Binding, and Non Dictating resolutions take enough priority over Legal, Binding, and Absolute international Law, that the UK needs to break these laws in order to accept the Invitation to negotiate?

fourthly and finally, why do you think spamming this long refuted tirade constitutes an actual argument? and why do you refuse to answer basic legal questions?

75 Braedon
I believe @Raul lives in the past, perhaps his education ended before he left short trousers,

He don’t answer his own questions, yet get support from his fellow short trousers,

A shame really but successful winners, always seem to breed losers,
He truly believes that Argentina has a god given right to claim whatever it chooses, without exception or hindrances by the owners of such claims .
.

Just a couple of comments, not about the Falklands status (as an Argentine, I actually do not support my governments push for the islands, the islanders should be left alone as the wish), but about the British posters here:

1. I always chuckle at how quickly they will resort to the line Argentina has huge problems, as if somehow that is an intellectually honest way of ending all argument, especially in 2012... the UK is as de facto broke at this very moment and isolated on MANY fronts (EU, Russia, Iran, Mercosur), like at no time in the last 200 years probably. Now, I'm not insinusting such troubled relations are the UK's fault entirely, some of it is the result of EU, South American, Iranian actions which you disagree on principle with, etc. But nontheless, it is manfiestly striking. At some point, you guys should sit down and perpend why this is without resorting to outdated and nationalistic glib answers. Also, your internal social situation seems quite fragile, judging by the riots last year.

2. To accuse Argentina of violating UN or WTO treaties is quite frankly hakneyed. The UK technically is also violating the UN by not decolonizing the Falklands or agreeing to negotiations. I'm not suggesting the UK should comply of course, but it is disingenuous to paint the UK as a beacon of law abiding geopolitik. Second, just as self-determination should be defended for the Falklands, it should be defended for Argentina. In other words: she can allow whoever she wishes to her ports, with some justificiation. There is nothing obligating Argentina from having to allow ALL ships in no matter what. Any ship, again with due cause, can be prohibited. The easiest way to do this would be a health hazard excuse.

Finally, the Brits here call the Argies uncivilized third worlders, in comparison to themselves i. Well, given such realities, then surely it is the Brits by their boorish responses who have had far more to lose in the reputation stakes ;)

well tobias, allow me to retort.
1) the insults over argentina's problems, past crimes and hypocritical on both almost always follows a lengthy monologue by some argentine who decides to smugly whine about how terrible, poverty stricken and evil Britain is, and how mighty argentina will somehow blackmail the UK into giving up the islands.

the problem being just about all these serious problems the UK seems to face exist merely in the mind of said argentines including yourself. the UK is still one of the most economically stable nations in the world, with the only question being when the recession will end, as opposed to if the recession will end, which most nations currently face.

in terms of being isolated our decision to not opt into the Euro rescue plan does nothing to isolate us politically, diplomatically or militarily, and it barely isolates us economically except making us exempt to German control of our budget. this in fact may be favorable to our position in Europe as now France and Germany want us on their side to counterbalance each other's influence.

in terms of Russia... what issue are you talking about? we are still close trading partners, and in terms of Iran we have about the EU, the USA, most of the commonwealth and other nations on our side. and in Mercosur, the blockade which is currently falling apart (due to the happiness of south american ports to accept the Union Jack and their support for argentina being limited to little more than verbal platitudes)

so far the isolation and poverty which argentine posters claim has us on our knees has manifested as a steady recovery from recession, and minor disagreements with the EU which may well be in our favor.

like i said though, were argentine posters not so frenzied in shrieking hysterically about Britain dealing with minor issues, we would not be so ready to respond by pointing out argentina failing to deal with major issues

I should warn you that as you are new to this you will soon realise that these pages are filled with mostly Argentine clap trap that is normally based on many years of bullshit fed to them over generations by corrupt dictatorships and governments, thus, it is often hard to see the truth hidden in all the bullshit...you need to be versed in the truth to see it clearly, however, once you do learn to spot it, it makes amusing reading. I need painkillers for my sore ribs I laugh that much, though on occasion I sob in despair. ;)

2) we accuse argentina of breaking international law because it is breaking international law. in particular regulations against illegal and unprovoked blockades, harassment and attacks on the island's economy in terms of the WTO, and more gravely, violating the Binding, Legal ruling of the UN charter and ICJ precedents and rulings regarding self determination, unprovoked persecution and attacks, and threatening the peace.

the UK is not only well within it's rights to decline the invitations (which are no longer issued for the last 20 years) by the GA to negotiate with argentina, it is legally required not to due to the aforementioned rules regarding self determination by the UN charter and the ICJ.

as i and countless others have told you with direct refrence to UN rules, GA resolutions are never legally binding or compelling. they are at best recommendations and at worst utterly irrelevent and illegal due to contravening the UN charter and ICJ rulings.

the decolonization issue is also irrelevant as the islands are a fully functioning democracy and have voted universally to remain with the UK. this type of situation is why the decolonization committee is no longer a relevant body as it acts in direct opposition not just to UN law, but to the GA resolution 1514 it was founded on, and is why it's resolutions are even less relevant than GA resolutions.

the UK has broken zero international law with regards to the Falklands, and this is one of the central reasons why argentina is too scared to take the issue to the ICJ, instead opting to try and bully the islanders into submission.

and in closing, no matter how boorish and insulting British posters may be. they still have every moral high ground over the vast majority of Argentine posters.

why?

because they are not demanding thousands of innocents be deemed subhuman because of a pathetic national obsession with a group of islands which have never done them or their country any wrong.

Hello. I have to agree with some of your points, and disagree with others.

Firstly there is no denying that both our countries have serious problems. We have been hard hit by recession, many of our young folks are out of work, and pay, conditions and living standards are being squeezed. I know that Argentina has a problem with inflation and that both countries have had some civil disorder recently (although from what I gather ours was worse than yours). The rioting made a lot of us ashamed and disgusted, it also shows that we need to give those young folks some hope and better moral guidance.

One of the reasons I feel so strongly about the Falkands issue is that everbody can do without the Argentine government constantly casuing trouble in the area.

If your country backed away from its cold war policy a lot of people in your country would be able to find work and employment providing services for the islands, particularly if there is a good deal of oil present. We would also feel happier about putting invsetment into the islands and the mercosur nations - again everyone would win from increased trade. You'd be able to form a genuine friendship with the UK and the Falklands - that would do a lot to heal the war wounds.

As to UN resolutions and negotiations, feeling runs too deep still. The fact that we keep getting sabre rattling from Buenas Ares reinforces the view over here that you are a hostile nation, it just makes us want to dig in an refuse to talk to you. You'd get further by just having normal realtions with us.

The problem with your argument about allowing ships to dock is that issues like that can esacalate into full blown trade wars. The refusal to allow RN ships to dock in SA ports was perceived as an insult, as is the refusal to recognise the Falklands flag. We could retaliate, for example be refusing to supply Brazil and Chile with spares for the ex RN vessels they acquired over the past few years.

But you see, there you did. Why do you call Argentina's issues major? In comparision to whom? the UK? Perhaps, but that only proves the point that for the longest time, the argentine posters had to bear the derisive dismisiveness of many a British poster when the UK was seen as strong. It's only natural and human nature that some will now see the UK's relative weakness compared to the past and make straw hats from hay. It is all relative in the end.

I personally do not like engaging in such diversions, I am no one to really judge other nations problems (I can comment but only knowing it is simple opinion). What I do not like is the judgmental attitude of many about Argentina. The reality when it comes to this matter is that Argentina's problems are exaggerated by her detractors (both individuals and the banking establishement and media), and that many in Argentina supportive of the government exaggerate the progress. There is rarely a middle, sensible, ground, the one I usually try tot take.

As per your appreciation of the Falkland Island's flag ban, your argument is totally flawed and twisted, sorry. The point was not to ban all ships from the Falklands, even Kirchner knows that would never fly. Nor was it to ban Union Jack waving ships. That is you overreaching on your assumptions of what was actually approved, so that when it is actually implemented (as a ban on Falkland Islands registries ONLY, andtnot on any other flag registries), you dress it up as a failure of Argentine diplomacy. God knows we have had many, no need to invent extra ones. There was never any intention of banning UK ships, nor would other S.A countries ever agree to that in the first place.

Though I do think it is sad that you seem to believe the UK should play this game of divide and conquer. You gave the France and Germany example, now the UK is trying to claim dividing Mercosur. That is not what a democracy should be all about...

im afraid i disagree with the sentiment you show here, though your intentions are indeed good.

Firstly i don't pretend that Britain is at all perfect. or indeed that it is unable to be criticized. However, argentines simpering about British economic issues is somewhat like Iran's habit of chastising the west for human rights abuses. For one to criticize another over any issue, one needs to be demonstrably either equal to or superior to the other on said issue for the criticism to have any relevance.

secondly the Argentine government will never stop it's attempts to bully the islanders, as that is their number 1 propaganda tool to prevent scrutiny of said government. this is actively and gleefully supported by a majority of the population, and apathetically tolerated by the rest, with zero opposition. Britain has underestimated this stupidity and jingoism, and it's attempts to build bridges will always be doomed to fail, as the other side takes enormous pride in burning bridges.

and friendship is simply impossible at this point. the time for healing war wounds would have been in the 80s and 90s.

instead during the 80s argentina tried to punish the islanders for not submitting, and during the 90s a painfully deluded government decided to employ an insulting policy of presuming not only had argentina's crimes been forgiven, but that argentina had the moral high ground over the islanders, and that the islanders were nothing but brainless kelpers who would come begging to become argentine if the government threw them a few toys and videos saying how great argentina was.

this was followed in 2000 by a tantrum which has yet to end when it became clear it's insulting the islanders had done nothing but annoy them, and it resumed the policy of punishing them for defying argentina's national myth.

argentina has done nothing but insult, bully, and blockade the islanders for 30 years since the war. they have long passed the point of no longer deserving sympathy

84 tobias
it is the Brits by their boorish responses who have had far more to lose in the reputation stakes

boorish, so what kind of response would suit you, let us know, and we will try to accommodate it for you,
may I add, that Argentina created this problem, not the islanders or the British,
I have said it once, and I will repeat it,
There is no excuse whatsoever , under any circumstances, why Argentina illegally invaded an unarmed peaceful little island without even provocation,
Nothing can excuse or justify what Argentina done, , Argentina are thus directly responsible for the deaths and injury of hundreds of people, full stop.

But of course that was 30 odd years ago, long enough for Argentina to make amends [is it not]
And what has the great Argentina done in these decades following the invasion,
You have abused, threatened, intimidated , blockaded , told abhorrent lies about them ,
Not very nice, for a so called democracy is it,

And all because you have an obsession and actively stalk the islands,
[talk] you have repeatedly stated that all talking must end with argentine sovereignty,
Nothing more,, nothing less, [how then do you propose we talk]

Now if Argentina, put away the indoctrinated attitude, and started treating the islanders with respect , helping them , talking to them , offering trade , and other things,
Don’t you think that that would be a start to a new beginning .
The words [sorry] costs nothing, and goes a long way .
Just my opinion .

I call the argentine issues major because they present major threats to argentina’s economy, stability and democracy. This is by comparison to both countries in the South America, and the UK.

And don’t pretend that argentines are the victims here. Insults about your economy, corruption and instability would not even occur was insulting Britain over its economy, “colonialism” and riots not the main tactic of argentine posters.

Even your government engages in this idiocy, with your ambassador to Washington simpering how Britain’s economy was “crumbling” and how Britain was “falling apart”. Even CFK shouted in what must be the most hilarious act of self righteous hypocrisy I have seen from her, that the UK is a “gross colonial power in decline”.

When argentina’s entire policy is spewing insults against the UK which are not only bullshit, but apply infinitely more to argentina, do not act like you have been wronged when we fire back.

What has argentina done to prove it’s detractors wrong? Where are the argentines who support the islanders’ basic human rights? Where is ANY opposition to the use of the subject as blatant propaganda?

And if the ban was not meant to ban ships from the Falklands, why has CFK, your foreign office and lawmakers all stated explicitly it is meant to stop ships from the Falklands?

Its not like there is anyone in argentina who cares that it is simple persecution of innocent people. Hell as a propaganda act to show how the government is “successfully” fulfilling the national obsession it is quite successful.

And the Union Jack comment was my way of pointing out how pathetic this blockade was, when even those nations supposedly supporting you were kind enough to tell the islanders the Union jack was still welcome.

I judge it a failure of diplomacy, as ten years of argentine diplomatic efforts has resulted in precisely zero meaningful support.

Britain has no need to play divide and conquer. South America is divided enough

@shb I'm the 1st who wants my gov to drop the obession of the Falklands. It really depresses me to always have to hear about it. If I was dictator I'd place a 25 year band on the issue, but alas, I don't want to be a dictator.

The flag: it may be insulting, but it's a right of any country to take such action. I personally think it counterproductive. So I agree with you that the best thing would be to have cordial relations. However I wouldn't go out of my way to pursue them, the islanders have also made racist comments and forced private argentine citizens to remove their flags lest be denied docking in the islands.

@braedon If anyone here calls any person sub-human, it is despicable plain and simple. Moving on.

Argentina could be braking international law, but using your own arguments about the GA res., it seems no one cares about this either because this issue with the Argentine ports (not the Mercosur ones), has been going on for much longer and no one in the world has complained (I mean seriously taken up the issue). So either you are exaggerating the blockade (a loaded word, let's be honest even if it is technically correct; when people think blockade they think rows of gunboats not letting you pass by), and using words like attack and threatening the peace... Or... perhaps then Argentina has a right to violate WTO! (btw, can't have it both ways: Argentina is blockading but ships are still passing by, you failed. May be the intention is not to blockade but to make silly political points!)

That's where your argument falls, you can claim Argentina is violating the moon, but SELF-DETERMINATION trumphs any treaty. If a nation deems a treaty they sign working against them, they can withdraw or ignore it. You can't force us to the WTO or anything.

Finally, so only having a superior stance allows you to comment on a topic? Then Braedon, I'm sure you will never discuss football, beef, women, wine, hydrotech, nuclear med with an argentine... get real!

@ 88 forced private argentine citizens to remove their flags lest be denied docking in the islands. oh, poor thing, we Argentines are so good, and people always treat us so bad for no reason, people are so evil :(

The flag: it may be insulting insulting? it's just a change of flag, how can this be insulting when the vessels come and go from and to the islands? Words, words, words.

@Tobias
The first and only from all appearances. Yet any respect this may earn you is quickly nullified when you criticise British posters for responding to argentine insults and bullshit, and then claim argentina is the victim.

I don’t think at all that argentina and Britain should have cordial relations. Such a thing is fundamentally impossible when argentina has a position stating that thousands of people under British protection are fundamentally subhuman and possess zero rights over their resources, over their livelihoods or even their homes, Especially when the reasons for this position are not only utterly fraudulent, but sickeningly hypocritical.

The difference between the islanders insulting you, and you insulting them, is that the islanders have every moral right to do so. Argentina has done nothing but try to make their lives hell, and this has been universally supported and tolerated by the argentine people.

Even those who presume to call themselves “peacemakers” have sickeningly bigoted attitudes towards the islanders, either deeming them brainless peasants who secretly wish to be argentine, or assuming it is the Islanders who are in the wrong, and who are to blame for argentina persecuting them.

And no one has complained simply because it has been utterly inefficient, A bit like how America does not complain because North Korea bans their goods despite it being technically illegal. Since argentina is a member both of the UN, and of the ICJ, and your actions are against another member, you are acting utterly illegally.

And lets see, we created football, international beauty standards vary by nation, argentina’s use of hydroelectricity and nuclear power is utterly unremarkable, and Britain does not even produce wine.

But hey if being 6th biggest wine producer compensates for the “whole third world country” thing then good for you.

@briton: I concur. Leave'em alone! But stop complaining if Argentina does not let their ships in (I'm not saying I agree with this policy, I just don't like hypocrisy of Argentina not being able to do what it wants in its ports). If it's good for the Falklands, it's good for Argentina.

Braedon,

I won't get drawn into an argument about the war. Any INVASION is wrong, including Argentina's. Yet on this respect, (and not suggesting the Falklands are part of this), you as a Brit have absolutely no moral leg whatsoever to comment or condemn, if we follow your own standard of who can opine or not.

Yup, the diplomacy it's been mainly flawed and at many a time disgraceful, you won't get arguments from me there. Argentina should apologize for the invasion (for some reason I thought Menem had), but I surely won't be going to kiss the islanders either. You see my position is leave them alone. I really don't care about the islands, nor will 3000 people's approval or dissaproval
of me for my nationality change my life, my finances, or my personal situation. Let em be.

As per your view on Argentina's stability, may I suggest you are brainwashed. Argentina's economy is NO ECONOMIC MODEL but it is not Haiti in comparison to the rest of South America, that is utter garbage and propaganda I'm sure The Economist feeds you. If so, you are as deluded and misinformed as the pro-K people with their 8% inflation rate.

Argentina's living standard is still clearly superior to almost all in Latin America, and even probably to Chile and Uruguay when you account for things like health-care, and access to education. I have been to Chile and Brazil recently, and reading the FT and the like one would expect to find Aston Martins, and Oakley sun-tanned people everywhere partying it away in a bonanza. I found just as much poverty in Chile and far worse in Porto Seguro and Rio.

Let's not even get into women, gay, and other social rights, where Argentina cleans the ground in progress.

And yet this invasion continues to be celebrated as a great and noble event by your government and by your people, who regret only that it failed, and all blame is placed on either the dictatorship, or more often, Britain and the islanders for having the audacity to fight back.

And yes we have every moral right to comment AND condemn as argentina attacked us and the islanders without any provocation or reason beyond an attempt to subjugate the islanders and steal territory.

Before you launch into a diatribe about “Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya”, our involvement in both Afghanistan and Libya were internationally supported if not required by the UN, and even our role in Iraq has infinitely more legal and moral backing than your attack on the Falklands.

Even kissing up to the islanders will likely fail as argentina and argentines have overwhelmingly demonstrated a complete contempt towards the islander’s basic human rights for the past 30 years, and has actively attempted to destroy their livelihoods.

The fact that you don’t explicitly support this is meaningless as you are completely alone in your opinion among argentines. Hell an opinion such as yours is routinely used as a strawman by the more obsessed argentines to criticise politicians and people who are not as fervent and zealous as they are about trying to hurt the islanders.

In terms of Women’s rights argentina is still significantly behind the UK due to domestic violence, abortion bans and other such issues. In terms of gay rights you trail behind us due to lack of anti discrimination laws.

And in terms of other social issues I could mention the horrific treatment of native argentines and the problems they face, I could mention the increasing censorship, or I could mention the corruption. All of which are essentially and comparatively nonexistent in the UK.

But would you then criticise me for “insulting” you by responding to your idiotic comment on UK human rights?

You are generalizing about Argentina in the broadest and
most blanket of ways. Universally supported by the argentine
people, you write of us. I may say the UK universally supports
pornography... that is so elliptical. I am alone in my views... Put up evidence
on such bold statements or be deemed as pure hyperbole, sir.

I won't get into games of discusssing your use of adjectives
like living hell of the islanders current status. Living hell
is the refuegee camps in Somalia. Living hell is the tents in
Haiti, living hell is Syria today... Get a grip sir.

You call all Argentines, without exception bigoted. One of the most, if not
the most important, definition of a BIGOT is: he who judges indiscriminately
without consideration for individual behavior or accomplishement.
Sir, may I suggest that description does not fit me based of what's redacted.

You may dismiss anything about Argentina, I don't care really, my comments
about football and the other things were just as an example
of how you made no sense, I can comment on economy even if Argentina's is
inferior to the UK's. You took them as an assault on the UK, when they were a simple example, and tiraded of how you invented the sport and things completely unrelated.

And now, you took my comment of Argentina's social standing within LATIN AMERICA, and again took them as a comparision to the UK, when it was a comparison with other S.A countries.

All of which proving that the blustering jingoist here isn't the argentine in this discussion either!

Your opinions of anything Argentina, outside the issue of the Falklands where
you have strong evidence to denounce Argentina's behavior, is from this
point on readily dismissed as you have irreparably traduced your objectivity there to zero.

Your attempts to place the UK above Argentina in every solitary positive category clearly a signal of underlying insecurity, and also dismissed.

Well Tobias,You have put your case very well but the fact is that Argentina has isolated itself from the bonanza and all the oil companies would have been supplied from Bahia Blanca,all the flights, all the helicoptors ,all the fuel,all the tugs,all the hotels.You are also missing out on repairing and supplying the entire international fishing fleet.You have also refused to share fishing stock science and your stocks have faced collapse.You have also missed out on the entire supply for the Falklands and its tourists who would fly via B A's. CFK has turned the Pink Palace into a Tumbadero and in the next 30 years , Argentina will miss out on Billions of £ worth of business. Britain is much the same as it was last year and the year before but Argentina is in panic mode and even trying to stop all the smart money leaving the sinking ship called Argentina !

I never said you insulted the islanders. I said your countrymen and your leaders do.

And if I am wrong kindly point me to any significant percentage of your population, or indeed any politician who explicitly reject the assertion that the islanders have no basic human right of self determination or ownership of their resources and homes, or even merely criticise their treatment at the hands of the government they elected.

For example find me ANY statement by ANY group or politician which either criticises the persecution of the islanders, or against the view that the islanders do not share the basic human rights that argentines demand.

And I did not say the islander’s lives were a living hell, I merely stated that argentina is attempting to make their lives hell through diplomatic bullying, economic blockades, and the attempts to have their basic human rights stripped.

Also, if an entire population has no objection to their elected government waging a widely publicised campaign of persecution against thousands of innocents for reasons not only painfully fraudulent but ridiculously hypocritical, then I reserve the right to call this population bigoted as they are fundamentally dismissing the rights of those their government attacks.

And I also have every right to be dismissive of someone who decides that British posters are not allowed to respond to the insults of your countrymen because Britain is not perfect, as such a view completely misses why these insults are used.

When you stated how argentina “cleans the ground” with regards to social issues I assumed you were attempting to compare yourself to Britain. If not then I take back my insult there.

However you still seem more upset by British posters being “nasty” than by your countrymen actively dismissing the basic human rights of innocent people because of a national myth, and that is what I take issue with.

@ 92 Let's not even get into women, gay, and other social rights, where Argentina cleans the ground in progress. London, for example, is the place to be if you're gay, black, white, yellow. man, woman, etc etc etc. You've never been in the UK, right?

I found just as much poverty in Chile and far worse in Porto Seguro and Rio. oh, you don't need to go to Brazil or Chile, here is Argentina we have the same reality.

There is no money made in moving oil around. The money is in extracting or refining it. Neither would have occurred within Argentina, so the rest is honestly chump change in comparison. HOWEVER, one should never turn down increased commerce but obviously the circumstances will not permit it; nevertheless, let's get real is not like Argentina will forever be damaged by not participating in any possible oil extraction down in the islands. I know nothing about fishing stocks.

Frankly, I trust no one on this site regarding the Argentine economy. Most here will say we are starving Somalians, the pro-K forces will sell me here yet again the 5% poverty and 8% inflation rate. What I fail to understand is how apperently sensible people who laugh at some of the official statistics Argentina's gov give, so readily believe what the Economist and FT say. They have been predicting for 10 years Argentina will collapse. How do they have any credibility whatsoever (and I'm a FREE market person!!).

Argentina's current model is exhausted. The economy needs to be sincerizada (made sincere again). I'm not sure this gov will do that, but eventually it will be forced on them. HOWEVER, it will be nothing like 2001 simply because there is no heavy debt level, no currency board, and commodity prices are still solid. Every single solitary crisis in Argentina's history has been caused by high foreign debt, a currency board not permitting adjustements, or depressed commodities.

And even if it was, our democracy survived. Most people here surely as elsewhere had been calling for civil war and secession. It's funny no one gives Argentina credit for getting out of that historic crisis with it's basic institutions intact. And btw, only country that was not bailed out (Russia, Korea, Thailand, Turkey, Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia, now many countries in Europe, the USA via China)... All bailed out. We recovered on our own and with the help of no one. :)

The Argentine political class will not do as you say. It is a matter of national policy, I don't like it but it's what it is. I don't have to provide you or anyone with statistics, even if I had them. You were the one who was making the blanket statements not me. You show the proof :)

I didn't say a majority support my view. However, many do, they just are not passionate and frankly, why should they be. It's not an important issue for us, like it is for the pro-Malvinas crowd. I'll give you this much: you have the right to be angry as you are with those that you think are causing wrong, but what I will always object to is to blanked, unsubstnatiated statements. That's all.

Finally, this is my first day, and you are on here right now. I have not encountered yet the chance to denounce those who deny or belittle the Falklanders and their rights. So perhaps, you should be more patient.

@xbarilox

I don't get your point. My point was, I read the Economist, FT (sadly more for entertainment value these days), and all you read is the glories of Brazil and Chile (and indirect attacks on Argentina). Yet I go there and did not find paradise. I've seen this movie before, as a precocious kid reading those same publications in the 90s... but then it was called Argentina, we were the darlings, the example for Planet Earth to follow. My point was that while I admire the goverments of Chile and Brazil, there is only so much they can do. There is still severe poverty in both countries. And IN SPITE of our government, many people are better off in Argentina.

I won't get into an argument about millions getting some food. Millions in the USA are also trying, and in Brazil, Russia, China... that proves what? You seem quick to judge me, I don't know long term by age maybe, but you don't know me and assuming you do maks you sophomoric. I'm sick of hearing how we are the worse country in the world by the anti-K crowd. Been blessed to travel I know its not IN SPITE of K!

A Non-Self-Governing Territory can be said to have reached a full measure of self-government by:

(a) Emergence as a sovereign independent State;
(b) Free association with an independent State; or
(c) Integration with an independent State.

At first, the UK's relations with the Falklands and other territories did not satisfy any of these, so it was ok to keep them on the UN list, but then in 1970 the UNGA passed Resolution 2625 in which another criterion was added to the ones in Resolution 1541

a)The establishment of a sovereign and independent State, b)the free association or c)integration with an independent State or d)the emergence into any other political status freely determined by a people constitute modes of implementing the right of self-determination by that people.

It's under this fourth criterion that the UK has decolonised its territories and it's the decolonisation committee which is not complying with UNGA resolutions

@ 100 Let's make it simple, if you want our country to be better, stop lying to yourself, end this stupid Nationalism based on lies and Anglophobia. I love the British people, I've met many of them, I know that they are kind, nice people. I've never heard from them something bad about me being Argentine, but I've heard stupid comments from people like you insulting me for saying this, so, who's the one judging Mr? Truth is sad, but it's always better than the sweetest lie. Jus as an example, if you get the chance, visit Durham, Newcastle and some of those cities, and you'll meet the nicest people on earth, all English, all great people. That's why I will never accept what you are doing to the Falklanders, all this Anglophobia that you yourself are trying to cover up will only hurt our country.

I have no Anglophobia (show were I displayed it), though I dislike the UK goverment's position on Antarctica a lot (not the Falklands). I am not lying to myself, and I haven't insulted you.

See, even as one of those argentines, who actually supports the Falklanders self-determination, I get branded an anglophobe by you. What do I have to do, go and kill myself so there is one less argie to prove my devotion? :)

You were the one who insulted my intelligence saying I have no long-term view, and then not expatiating on the matter, as if I was not worthy of your further explanation. So of course, that does not set up a good rapport, now does it?

May I suggest you are evincing a classic case or argiephobia.

Oh, you said you are argie. Well, you must be one of those ex-pat argies with seething resentment for his country, because it let you down somehow. That's deff an argie traits, all other immigrants may feel bad but still love their country.

I don't have to tell you if I have English friends. Thanks to the rugby world, I do... Again, you are talking out of the After, as ze Germans would say. You don't know me.

Hey you all sophisticated British, start learning the real history. You are the children of an Empire that is ending. Enjoy the dessert because the check is coming. You are not going to do more than damage to the future British generations.not returning the land of the poor islanders that were kicked out 200 years ago.
Why smart and educated people like you always read the book history from the last chapter? If you have attention span and cannot not read may be because of insults created by alcoholic motherhood during the first week of you own early stage development. For one can understand, your disability.
I know that is hard to leave your fake status as  first class citizen of the world under the condition that you will pay the luxury of life of the royal family( including the dogs). Enjoy that fake status while it lasts.

Even if there were people expelled 200 years ago, one has to be realistic about the PRESENT. If we all get upset of who got expelled back when, then we may as well damn all countries and civilizations. Every single society today, perhaps excepting the Inuit (which are not their own country), is a result of expulsion, invasion, mixture.

This whole discussing which history is correct is so old, counterproductive, and in the end futile. It solves nothing today. And Argentina should forget about the Falklands it is missing the real negotiating target which should be Antarctica.

The future ?? Not been written yet :-)
Simple inference.Argentina up uk down.....with a 9 trillion pound external debt!
Just follows Jim Rogers advice: To the young people in uk,learn Chinese and get out,you have no future in uk”
That is the future......

With all due respect Lord, just because it's in English, and its British, does not make it more verily. I'm not saying it is not the truth, but there is no way it can be proven. In the end, the past doesn't matter in this case, it is what it is now.

@ Malvinero...

You really believe what you say? Argentina is up because of it's people and not the government. It is doing many things that are harmful long term. They still have time to correct some of them, but that time is running short. Mainly, we need to become RELIABLE to the rest of the world, in diplocacy, in rules of trade. Argentina is a joke in that area, and we may think it's good short term but long term it means no one trust us.

l was following an extremely interesting debate between tobias & Braedon, with a few other posters when it was terminated because two idiots, you are not the first & malvinero1 gatecrashed the party!
@20Artillero601,
Maybe that's how she likes it♥
@22Elaine,
Don't you just hate it when that happens♥

Thanks for your reply, I was talking in an ideal world. I agree with you that the Argentinians have completely destroyed any chance of friendly relations between our 2 countries for the forseeable future. What is worse I don't see them ever trying to set things straight, they have become too wedded to their policy of intimidation and insult to back down, and they think they're on a roll.

@Tobias - your statement about just how long the falklanders have been resident on the islands is spot on - 1833 was a long time ago, on the basis that we occupied that land once half of the UK could be claimed by Norway, Italy and France. The falklanders live there now and should be left in peace.

Lord, prove to me that Julius Caesar was assassinated, prove to me that World War II happened (if we didn't have pictures). It cannot be done. History, as I always say, no matter how true or real it trully was, in the end is a leap of faith. And by history I don't mean ruins of ancient buildings, those obviously prove their existence by their mere standing. I mean the people and the actions written in the books.

Tecnology today affords us the luxury of more certainty of history, mainly the 20th century, but before that, for all we know Rome was Carthage, and Carthage was Rome. :)

Ultimately, it does not matter. The Falklanders are ethnically British, they don't want to change that, and the UK and Argentina will never get along again, even if the Falklands issue was somehow set aside.

Now if Caesar's assassination had been accompanied by the correct diplomatic correspondence then that I would add those as the relevant citations. And the death would have source material as evidence. Simple!

Falklands history does not go back so far, as you well know, and there is a mass of source material to 'prove' the various events.

But you are right, it does not matter. The 'Present' is the only game in town.

Look I am not making this stament from my own random cogitation to achieve a vain display of sciolist zelaotry. It is exceedingly rare that when there are two competing historical accounts, one is 100% veracious, and the other is 100% apocripha. I know people here want to pretend that is the case, but the real world does not function like this message board.

History is often written from the perspective of the writer or writers' milieu, environment, or ideology. Tendentious embellishement or yes, many a time outright interpolating, to objective narratives can rarely be avoided because it is human nature. It must be said, and this is not to ruffle feathers but a valid opinion based on empirical experience, that Anglo-saxon (British, American, Australian), on the aggregate believe their version of history is inviolate and accurate, and all others are thus disposable. I have seen similar debates on the veracity of historical accounts by Anglo-saxon members not just with Argentines on the issue of the history of the Falkland Islands, have seen it vs French, or German, or Russian, or Arabic members in other areas.

I don't question the history presented by the parties involved (a futile excercise mostly, especially in deeply entrenched and perfervid debates such as here), because as I have been attempting to demonstrate it is actually difficult to prove history in the same manner as repeatable scientific phenomena. What I do question is individuals that believe their side is always unnassailable, and the other ever reproachable. For those of us that try to have a more disinterested analysis, such a posture inevitably forces us to take whatever accounts are spoken or written with a dose of salt.

When comparing different but sensible versions of the same history what you often find is that the data part, names places dates and even approx numbers are often broadly the same.
What is different is the perspectives from which events are viewed,
and therefore the interpretation of the same events is different.
In the case of the different historys of the S. Atlantic/Antartic here, nothing is the same.
I do think that British history is generaly pretty reliable. Two reasons I believe, first history for the British is an academic subject, books written by academics for academics, lowley politics not usually involved. Second
with a history like the British you can afford to be acurate about your reverses, as there are far more victorys.
British history books often examine defeats in far more detail than victorys.

I would agree that British historical accounts may on the whole based on a stronger democratic history (thus more opportunity for dissent and counter-factualist rebuttal). I wasn't suggesting otherwise.

However, it does not make it unquestionable. Which is what far too many here try to bang you through the wall with.

A tradition of democracy is more imporant to accurate history than victories. For all the propaganda here about lowly Argentina, the 19th century was rather succesful: drove Brazil off Uruguay, drove the Spanish from Chile and Peru alongside other armies, gained large territories in the north from the Paraguayan War, gained the greater chunk of Patagonia in the race to the tip with Chile.

Yet, sadly, Argentine accounts still depict victimization in some of those processes, which is attributable to political revisionsim which is ever present in this country.

British history with more reliable and long-lasting independent intitutions lend it great credit, but it does no mean they are beyond reproach.

Of course not, British history is by no means perfect, or always accurate.

History is generaly used when the present situation does not suit one or more parties in a dispute. Then all kind of alledged historical reasons appear as to why something should be changed in the present, usually involving force.
History perverted to a political agenda like this is better called propaganda. Historically a well troden path.

Where is the evidence for the autopsy? from the manuscripts of the time? Suetonius? which it brings a point. The roman description of Cleopatra is one and the Egyptians have a whole different description of the pharaoh. Is this a manipulation of history? By the way, one of my favorite generals wrote the following:

I would agree. I really know little about the competing histories about the exploration of the South Atlantic, actually, I don't care much for it.

@Artillero

You are making my point. Anything written down is absolutely meaningless to theoretical evidence. At best it could be labeled empirical based on the experiences of an observer who told what he saw or wrote it down. In true science, such evidence woudn't not even get anything past the postulation stage.

history history,
the truth for real history,
1, unless you were their, you cannot prove nothing,
2, written evidence, is not always excepted or is it true,
3, is it not true that the bible was written 100 + years after the events
4, a dying declaration is normally excepted [not always]
God help you if he hated you, and wrote you did it,
When in fact it was a burglar,
6, ??what you believe, is exactly what you believe .
Even if it is not the truth,
13, if you truthfully told a lie,
In fact you would be telling the truth, [would you not ]

And that is why there are competing theories that completely do away with dark energy, and explain the Universe's increased expansion by other means (string theory I think is one of them, by making gravity far stronger in hidden dimensions, thus eliminating the need of dark energy... I'm only a dillettante in cosmology though). :)

Since, as you state, there was nobody there, I wouldn't even consider using the word usurp for a start...
Nor would I be attempting to indoctrinate children - they deserve the right to be able to enjoy childhood without having to put up with that sort of bullshit - maybe that's what the problem in Argentina is...

“It's funny, thousands of miles from England trying to preserve a nationalism that does not even exist in the land of our ancestors, he says.” And when one is traveling island with reality: the British do not really know who we are or where we are. A came to congratulate me so surprised by my good English. “I feel a proper place, not England. I have no nationalist sentiments, in any case, yes I am moved by the landscape of the islands to be there, alone in the end of the world, is a unique sensation.”

@138briton,
Let's take a break from these deluded malvinistas.
Mum grew up in London & Guildford although she was born in Paris.
l love London, always look foreward to our holidays there.
l think it was Jonathon Swift who said-
When you are tired of London, you are tired of life
We lived in Wimbledon for a while before we went to the far east.
Fond memories of Devon also. Do you know Ottery-St Mary's?
Have to admit l got drunk on scrumpy, it didn't take much!
Thats a powerful drink! but nice & sweet.
Cheers briton.♥

no,,but the world does,lol.
//////////////////////////////
143 lsolde
yes born in notting hill, not to bad, but loved and miss pie & mash,
grandfather came from axminster, and the family alldesend from east devon, colyton southleigh OSM [been their nice place] sidmouth ect ect,
devon is very nice, just a pity they went to london in 1850s,
not that i dont like it, but id rather be in the country,
but we live in herts now, not bad .
why di you go to far east, was it with the militery .

109 lsolde (#) I spotted those play on words as well and was highly amused. I like a good sense of humour.
Peter Pepper arrives in Stanley today and I think he said he would be staying with James Pratt (?); anyway try to look him up you will enjoy him. I told him you might contact him. I know Devon well having been at school in Tavistock.

147 Think (#) Yes at 70 I am a Viejo Verde and with a lewd mind. Laughing at ourselves and life is what keeps you young. My radar for girls is still powered up and working; there'd be something damn wrong with me if it wasn't and the Polaca puts up with it with grace. I am lucky that I have an Irish son-in-law who is just the same and we have good laughs together.

Awww, babyThink had his comment removed, diddums.
@146 Tim,
Thanks for the comments. One has to have a sense of humour in this world. l can't stand miserable people.
You've lost me with the viejo verde- old green man or green old man?
ls it something like a roué?
l am slowly learning Spanish, don't really have a lot of spare time, but l try.
Wish my brother & his wife were here. They are both fluent.
There is nothing wrong with a senior(l won't say old!)man having an eye for the girls.
Many women prefer the attitude of a mature man.
A lot of Chinese women demand a man who is at least 20 years older.
l don't know Devon that well. Just been there a couple of times.
l had a great uncle in Dorset but he has passed on now.
Ottery St Marys sticks in my mind as the time l was visiting there was some festival & young men were running through the streets with burning barrels of tar. Quite dangerous really!
The scrumpy was sweet & delicious but the barman refused to let me have more than two pints!
When l got out into the cold air, l understood why!
Anyway, nice chatting with you, must go, coffee time!

He deletes my comments with the sole excuse that they are in Spanish….

But he consents several British posters to call our mothers and sister prostitutes, to shaft our women with flagpoles, to piss on our soldiers tombs……………....................... and many other “niceties”.

But well……
I suppose that the poor soul is just doing what he is being paid to do……..

Wrong, Think... I reported as abuse an open invitation, in Spanish, to those on one particular side of the issue, to continue blogging in Spanish so as to frustrate the bloggers using, and probably only able to use, English... Correct me if I'm wrong, but from memory, the terms of the sign-up state that all posts must/should be in English. This I saw as fifth columnism, at best, and for immediate want of a better term. They're still ignoring me - so why isn't he doing what he's supposed to?

#156Thats our “honourable” Argentines, use any dirty tricks they can, just so they can win.
Always the victims.
Scuppered another think-scheme. :-)
Sure the Argentines we are sooo bad....Cut it out,isolde....
We are normal people who wants our property back...
BTW,how is the illex Argentinenses doing? Are you making a lot of money from it?

139, anyone who knows Jamie Peck will tell you what a totally self-centred individual he is. His situation is also complicated by being married to an Argentine with children to both Falkland and Argentine partners. This guy who now feels he is more Argentine than British was running for election as a member of the legislative assembly of the Falklands only a few years ago. He's not a good example for you to use and you are welcome to him. No loss to the Falklands at all.

@158 Think:
Unfortunately for you, most people in Britain don't find those sort of jokes particularly offensive (apart from perhaps a few die-hard Di fans). Those sort of jokes always do the rounds whever anyone famous dies. It's almost like a tradition over here.

I realised you were referring to your deleted post which I had read. Why anyone complained about it - which must have been the case - is beyond me. Why my complaint was ignored - not that it bothers me - I know not either. Yours was deemed offensive, perhaps, whereas mine was re a mere techicality?

@157 Malvinero1,
Are you going to give Paraguay it's property back?
You know, the land your country stole from them in 1871.
l have no interests in fishing.
l receive lots & lots of money from foreign share dividends & from earnings in farmland products overseas.
But l'm happy for my neighbours to make a living from a resource that THEY OWN.

Are you going to give Paraguay it's property back?
You know, the land your country stole from them in 1871.
l have no interests in fishing.
Why do not study history,Isolde and then we talk.
BTW,the Viceroyalty of the River Plate was much larger than today's Argentina.Brazil you can say has conquered Argentine territory...Argentina was quiete passive.Just look at the MAlvinas actions...We could have sebd a ship against Onslow,it was decide to do it diplomatically,quiete on the contrary that uk.
BTW,if Argentina give the brits a good deal on Malvinas,you are history like the chagosian and HK.....

BBC TV aired a programme called “inside out” tonight. It is about a British AA gunner who downed an A4 Skyhawk during the War. He believed he had killed the pilot. However, the pilot ejected safely and the programme got the 2 of them together. I haven't seen it yet, but a preview I heard on Radio 4 today sounded very good. It is available on Iplayer.

Besides………
I wouldn’t say that “Dirty Old Man” is the most adequate translation for “Viejo Verde”
DOM lacks most of the Spanish positive socio-cultural connotations….:-)
An example:
”Viejo verde is a common label for a man who chases younger women. ('Viejo' of course meaning old, and 'verde' meaning 'green' or--in this case--'young'.) …………
This label of viejo verde is also valid when an older man's admiration of a young woman is verbalized but not necessarily acted on………………….. costaricaspanish.blogspot.com/2008/11/word-of-day-viejo-verde.html

@168Malvinero1,
l dare say that my knowledge of history is a lot better than yours.
l don't ignore the bad bits, while you malvinistas will never admit it when you are wrong.
But you didn't answer the question, since you know everything & are so morally exhalted:-
When is Argentina going to return to Paraguay, the land that it STOLE in 1871?
You & your ilk hysterically scream on about us being pirates & thieves etc, but you are the ones who do it!
lt is hard to reason with such hypocritical people like you malvinistas.
So now l won't even try. so, malvinero1, can l expect to see a transfer of land from Argentina to Paraguay in the near future? Of course there would be compensation paid to the Paraguayans for 140 years of illegal occupation of their land also.
@171 Tim,
l guess that no-one wants to grow old, but we all will of course.
The ones that don't die young that is.
Actually l relate better to older people than folks of my own age.
An old male friend told me once, that he knew he was getting old because a new shiny tractor looked better to him than a pretty woman! :-)

172 Think (#) I don't think I would chase young women as I might embarrass myself when it comes to the crunch. In Spanish off colour jokes are Green Jokes in English they are Blue, wouldn't the verde come from here?

173 lsolde (#) Having just bought a new tractor for our garden cemetery I can assure you that I would still go for a pretty woman, however nice and shiny the new tractor is.

One has been a member for years,
And chooses many faces of disguises many have ideas of nationality
From an Eskimo to a Scandinavian yeti,
An African warrior to a European yoyo,
Or a south American argie to a Chile, concarny .
But as he wishes to remain anonymous
Then forever will you guess,
Not that he cares one way or another,
For me,
A Yorkshire man, will be my pie in the sky .

We must understand that this discussion is not an attempt to change the colonial
culture in those individuals who use such vehicle to identify their utopic superiority among our other members of our human race. We will never change the mind of a white man( I say as an European descendent) who believes in his empty hierarchy position, even when his reality punches and pushes closer and closer to poverty as a result of empty savings thanks to his obsolete ideals. Indeed, he will continue teaching to his own children that they are superior, therefore owner of each matter he finger prints with a little knowledge of history and consequences.
After all, so many years living under the shoes of royal supremacy of their own comrades he has learned and has became nothing but the the principal victim. Enjoy the ride my Argentinian bothers and sister and laugh at them because there is nothing worse than seeing somebody falling into the same pig mad, while they are trying to explain the intellectual and sophisticated beliefs.

@175briton,
You have poetic talent, my man!
@176 you are not the first,
neither are you the first, my man.
but l congratulate you on your rambling litany.
All people think that they are superior to their neighbours.
lts a human trait, unfortunately